Kuber Tobacco Products (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

18 DTR 1High Court2009#13662 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing Kuber Tobacco Products (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

ALCHEMIE DYE CHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-15((1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5429/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…unt be subject to disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. We set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO with a direction to pass afresh order as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities 18 DTR 1 (Mumbai) (2009). It is needless to mention that before passing afresh order of assessment, the AO shall provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3 M/s. Alchemie Dye Chem Pvt. Ltd., 13. Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of AO shall in no way be construed as having any ref…

ANUSHAKTI CHEMICALS & DRUGS LTD.(FORMERLY AARTI HEALTHCARE LTD NOW MERGED WITH AARTI INDUSTRIES LIMITED.),MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(1)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4964/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4964/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) Anushakti Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. Acit -15(1)(1) [Formerly Aarti Healthcare Ltd. Now Merged Mumbai. बनाम/ With Aarti Industries Ltd.] Vs. 2Nd Floor, Udyog Kshetra, Mulund Goregaon Link Road, Mumbai-400 080. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-3517-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala-Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Michael Jerald-Ld.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 15/10/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 15/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Michael Jerald-Ld.DR

Section 115JSection 14A

…1 M/s Anushakti Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. Assessment Year-2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4964/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) Anushakti Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. ACIT -15(1)(1) [Formerly Aarti Healthcare Ltd. now merged Mumbai. बनाम/ with Aarti Industries Ltd.] Vs. 2nd Floor, Udyog Kshetra, Mulund Goregaon Link Road, Mumbai-400 080. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACA-3517-H (अ…

ALCHEMIC DYE CHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7386/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7386/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Satishchandra

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…n advanced to M/s Aarti Drugs. Thus, interest only to the extent as attributable to balance amount be subject to disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 11. In this way, we rely upon the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities 18 DTR 1 (Mumbai) (2009), wherein it was held that if there are funds available both, interest-free and overdraft and/or loans are taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be 6 I.T.A. No. 7386/Mum/2017 Alchemic Dye Chem Pvt. Ltd. out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds are sufficie…

SHRI SACHIN JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. ITO, RISHIKESH

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4840/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2005-06 Sachin Jain, Vs. Ito, S/O Shri Chaman Lal Jain, Ward-1(4)(2), Near Jain Mandir, Shanti Nagar, Rishikesh. Rishikesh. Pan: Adhpj2085N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Tiwari & Shri Shobhit Tiwari,, Advocates Revenue By : Shri D.S. Rawat, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St January, 2016 Of The Cit(A), Dehradun, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. This Is The Second Round Of Litigation Before The Tribunal. This Appeal Was Earlier Dismissed By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 29Th December, 2016 For Non- Prosecution. Subsequently, The Tribunal, Vide Order Dated 9Th March, 2018, Recalled Its Earlier Order. Hence, This Is A Recalled Matter. 3. There Is A Delay Of 152 Days In Filing Of This Appeal Before The Tribunal By The Assessee. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal. After Considering The Submissions Made Therein & On A Perusal Of The Record, The Delay In Filing Of The Appeal Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari &For Respondent: Shri D.S. Rawat, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 153(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Sachin Jain, Vs. ITO, S/o Shri Chaman Lal Jain, Ward-1(4)(2), Near Jain Mandir, Shanti Nagar, Rishikesh. Rishikesh. PAN: ADHPJ2085N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rohit Tiwari & Shri Shobhit Tiwari,, Advocates Revenue by : Shri D.S. Rawat, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 1st January, 2016 of the CIT(A), Dehradun, relating to Assessment Year…

ALCHEMIE FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6886/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6886/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) बिाम/ Alchemie Financial Services Dcit ,Range-10(3), Ltd. Mumbai 2N D Floor, Udyog Kshetra V. Mulund, Goregoan Link Road, Off Lbs Road Mulund (W), Mumbai-400080 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaaca0948C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Dr

For Appellant: Shri. Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav,DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…30 Reserves- and surplus 1705.42 2006.19 Own funds 636.48 239.60 Cost of tax free investments The assessee also , inter-alia , relied upon Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited v. CIT reported in (2009) 18 DTR 1 (Bom.)and also decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Limited v. DCIT reported in (2014) 366 ITR 505(Bom.) but learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee because assessee could not demonstrate nexus of investments with interest-free funds available with the assessee.. However ,with respect to the indirect expe…

KISHORE NATWARLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 20(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 6084/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.8815/Mum/2010 & I.T.A.6084/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Kishore Natwarlal Shah Income Tax Officer Ward बनाम/ B/25, Jay View, 20(1)(4) Vs. Sahakar Nagar, Sixth Floor, Near Apana Bazar, Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug Andheri(West), Parel, Mumbai - 400053 Mumbai - 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aljps5237K

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri B. D. Naik

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 292B

…ct is wrong against law and facts and is liable to be set aside. He also placed reliance of the law settled in CIT Vs. Mr. Salman A.Y. 2006-07 Khan I.T. Appeal no. 2362 of 2009 dated 01.12.2009 (Bombay High Court) and Kuber Tobacco Products (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 18 DTR 1 (Delhi Special Bench). It is also argued that the present case is of the A.Y.2006-07 whereas the section 292BB of the Act was having different facts from the present case, therefore the said provision is not applicable to the present case. On the other hand, the learned representative of the department has placed reliance upon the order passed by th…

KISHORE NATWARLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 20(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 8815/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri N. R. Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri B. D. Naik

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 292B